[EM] Poll, preliminary ballots

[Richard, the VoteFair guy]

On 4/18/2024 1:17 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
 > There doesn't need to be a fixed proportion of failures, does there?

You are correct.

What I'm taking into account are two factors:

* How deeply down into the pairwise counts does the method look?

* How convoluted is the counting process?

The Schulze method looks very deeply into the pairwise counts.  However, 
its counting process is so convoluted that it's very difficult to 
comprehend.

I suspect that that convolution causes lots of IIA failures.

Research is needed to measure failure rates.

I really don't know what those measurements will reveal.

Interestingly, Yee diagrams serve as a simple way to measure some IIA 
failure rates.  They clearly reveal the IIA failures of IRV.

We need something even better to identify and measure the failure rates 
of better counting methods.

The graph I generated and referred to is just a beginning.  We need lots 
more research that measures failure RATES.  Just looking at 
pass-versus-fail checkboxes is not looking deep enough.

Then we will know more about the failures for which we do not have names.

Richard Fobes
The VoteFair guy


On 4/18/2024 1:17 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
> On 2024-04-18 20:43, Richard, the VoteFair guy wrote:
> 
>> It's easy to overlook the many failures that do not fit within NAMED 
>> failure types.  Those unnamed kinds of failures are being ignored!
>>
>> For example, clone failures and Local IIA failures are just two 
>> categories within the broad category of IIA failures.
>>
>> This is why I presume the Schulze method fails the various unnamed IIA 
>> criteria in order to have zero clone failures.
> There doesn't need to be a fixed proportion of failures, does there?
> 
> Suppose I take Schulze and break ties by Plurality so that it's no 
> longer cloneproof. I don't think that the rate of non-clone IIA failures 
> would decrease just because it now fails clone independence.
> 
> So Schulze's rate of IIA failures don't need to be a consequence of 
> having zero clone failures. It's possible that other methods have clone 
> failures *and* just as many other IIA failures.
> 
> -km